成唯識論掌中樞要 2.267

2.267

第二有義：後得無分別智斷迷事隨眠者，解前文云：先據斷迷理隨眠，非斷迷事。又前約斷究竟一切麁重，非因位中斷二障種語。又前約有漏安立及無漏安立諦語，非後得緣非安立語，亦無分別相故，即彼論云：若不要緣非安立者，有於淨定心順決擇分者，轉緣諸諦時，應斷隨眠等。彼既不爾，故但簡有漏等，非為盡理。不果，披彼文應尋之。

The second opinion holds: Subsequently attained non-conceptual wisdom abandons latent dispositions deluded regarding affairs. Explaining the previous text, it says: The earlier [text] was based on abandoning latent dispositions deluded regarding principle, not abandoning those deluded regarding affairs. Furthermore, the earlier [text] concerned the ultimate abandonment of all heaviness, not the seeds of the two obstacles abandoned in the causal state. Furthermore, the earlier [text] concerned sāsrava conventional and anāsrava conventional truths, not the subsequently attained [wisdom] cognizing non-conventional [truth], as it also lacks conceptual characteristics. Thus that treatise states: If it were not necessary to cognize non-conventional [truth], then when one who is compliant with the aids to penetration within a pure samādhi mind turns to cognize the truths, one would abandon latent dispositions, and so forth. Since that is not the case, it merely excludes the sāsrava and so forth, and is not an exhaustive account of principle. If unsuccessful, one should search the text by consulting it.